Palmer Orbit 11 Monitor Review

[illusonic]

Definitely not 20-20k. Can't remember now without looking at the doc but I think that for mix stages it might be down 3db at 16k or something, for smaller studios I can't recall either unfortunately. I can probably dig up the docs if you're interested. Not sure if THD limits are specified.

You demanded 20dB headroom over 86dBSPL to satisfy the Dolby THX spec. Now its seems you're not so strictly tied to that spec anyways.

As you see below, the Orbits do play 106dBSPL above 70Hz with -6dB at 50Hz.
Search for "stoneeh Palmer Orbit" in youtube for the source of the measurement.
So adding a sub with a crossover between 50 and 80Hz can provide fullrange 106dBSPL playback.

Another option would be multiple Orbits with some kind of bass management.
For example 5 Orbits + Denon AVC-X3800H + Dirac ART bundle for 5800€ (probably ART can also run on PC/Mac?).
This should provide about 98dB at 30Hz without sub in free air.
Add some 8-12dB room gain and you should be close to the THX spec.

 

[TK_IIVI]

You demanded 20dB headroom

No, you asked a question and I gave an answer to that question. Any "demands" that I mention are Dolby demands, not mine.

over 86dBSPL to satisfy the Dolby THX spec. Now its seems you're not so strictly tied to that spec anyways.

Not "THX". THX was never Dolby. THX is Lucasfilm.

Also, "not so strictly tied to that spec anyways" implies that I either said I personally have to stick to it, or that other people have to. That wasn't my point, my point was only to respond to your question that within certain contexts speakers need a certain amount of headroom. Personally, I set my home studio up according to Dolby specs within reason in order to make translation to studios or mix stages more consistent. I am only responsible for my setup. Since I'm not an audio-post technician responsible for setting them up I don't keep all of this information in my head at all times. I set up my space balancing various parameters (ergonomics, sound etc.), measured it using source material that made sense (AES speech sample, noise and tones) and measured using a calibrated mic with REW. I take it as far as I need to, and if it works I just get to working. It works.

That's why I don't have all the requirements in my head, and if you want them because you are curious about how it works I offered them. My comment was not meant to argue for or against the Orbits or any other specific speaker.

As you see below, the Orbits do play 106dBSPL above 70Hz with -6dB at 50Hz.
Search for "stoneeh Palmer Orbit" in youtube for the source of the measurement.
So adding a sub with a crossover between 50 and 80Hz can provide fullrange 106dBSPL playback.

Another option would be multiple Orbits with some kind of bass management.
For example 5 Orbits + Denon AVC-X3800H + Dirac ART bundle for 5800€ (probably ART can also run on PC/Mac?).
This should provide about 98dB at 30Hz without sub in free air.
Add some 8-12dB room gain and you should be close to the THX spec.

I'm 99% certain the spec is down to 20Hz and it's the high-end that's not extending to 20k. You are absolutely right that you can integrate all sorts of items in your B-chain, including a sub, to get playback within spec. Absolutely.

Again, I'm definitely not arguing for or against any specific speaker, and I didn't want to "debate" it, just offered a reason for why a playback system has certain requirements relative to loudness based on how I interpreted your question.

 

[Froghawk]

Some of us mix engineers work with sound-to-picture and need the headroom for loud short-term sections and peaks. Might be a 2-3 second section, or 30 seconds. Regardless, the speaker needs to be able to reproduce sufficient loudness above average level to accommodate for that.

Dolby spec at listening position on a mix stage (theater) is 86dB, but with 20 dB headroom. If you are using these as nearfields and for streaming and television and in a smaller room you still want good headroom. Loudness standard for broadcast is -23 or -24 LUFS, so still giving us over 20dB headroom within the mix itself. So if your normal mix level is at 70dB (since you mentioned it) for example you still want to be able to hit that plus the headroom, which in case of the latter type of content brings you to 94dB.

Makes sense?

Indeed it does, thanks for the explanation!!

 

[illusonic]

No, you asked a question and I gave an answer to that question. Any "demands" that I mention are Dolby demands, not mine.



Not "THX". THX was never Dolby. THX is Lucasfilm.

Also, "not so strictly tied to that spec anyways" implies that I either said I personally have to stick to it, or that other people have to. That wasn't my point, my point was only to respond to your question that within certain contexts speakers need a certain amount of headroom. Personally, I set my home studio up according to Dolby specs within reason in order to make translation to studios or mix stages more consistent. I am only responsible for my setup. Since I'm not an audio-post technician responsible for setting them up I don't keep all of this information in my head at all times. I set up my space balancing various parameters (ergonomics, sound etc.), measured it using source material that made sense (AES speech sample, noise and tones) and measured using a calibrated mic with REW. I take it as far as I need to, and if it works I just get to working. It works.

That's why I don't have all the requirements in my head, and if you want them because you are curious about how it works I offered them. My comment was not meant to argue for or against the Orbits or any other specific speaker.



I'm 99% certain the spec is down to 20Hz and it's the high-end that's not extending to 20k. You are absolutely right that you can integrate all sorts of items in your B-chain, including a sub, to get playback within spec. Absolutely.

Again, I'm definitely not arguing for or against any specific speaker, and I didn't want to "debate" it, just offered a reason for why a playback system has certain requirements relative to loudness based on how I interpreted your question.

Allright, then you know now that "Some of us you mix engineers [that] work with sound-to-picture and need the headroom for loud short-term sections and peaks" can use the Orbits under certain circumstances. Btw. the initial question did not come from me. After your comment I thought it may help to make you aware of the 106dB SPL measurement available on youtube.

 

[TK_IIVI]

Allright, then you know now that "Some of us you mix engineers [that] work with sound-to-picture and need the headroom for loud short-term sections and peaks" can use the Orbits under certain circumstances. Btw.

Sure.

the initial question did not come from me. After your comment I thought it may help to make you aware of the 106dB SPL measurement available on youtube.

You're right. Sorry about that. Juggling a lot of things so I got that mixed up.

 

[KL....]

Thank you, to ask.... how do you all ABX/Level Matching these relative to a Passive Speaker/Amp/Cable combination or Active combination?

 

[amirm]

Thank you, to ask.... how do you all ABX/Level Matching these relative to a Passive Speaker/Amp/Cable combination?

Here is what Dr. Olive uses in his studies:

"Each loudspeaker was level-matched to within 0.25
dB (B-weighted) using pink noise fed to each
loudspeaker. The calibrated microphone (AKG-CK62)
was positioned at ear-height over the middle front row
chair. Levels were calculated using SpectraLAB
(version 4.32). The average playback level of the
program selections in the listening room was 75 dB (Bweighted)."

 

[KL....]

Here is what Dr. Olive uses in his studies:

"Each loudspeaker was level-matched to within 0.25
dB (B-weighted) using pink noise fed to each
loudspeaker. The calibrated microphone (AKG-CK62)
was positioned at ear-height over the middle front row
chair. Levels were calculated using SpectraLAB
(version 4.32). The average playback level of the
program selections in the listening room was 75 dB (Bweighted)."

Thank you, @amirm, would you suggest that this method supercedes the Measure or that the Measure is sufficient to derive/interpolate this method. Many will not have the Tools to perform this method (or expertise), will they?

 

[Descartes]

This is a review, listening tests and detailed measurements of the Palmer Orbit 11 Cardioid coaxial professional monitor (powered speaker). It was sent to me by the company and costs US $899 each.
View attachment 517745
This is a cute but super dense and have little thing! I don't think filling it with lead would make it any heavier. Construction feels like inch think metal. The shiny woofer takes away a bit from the look but for professional market, I don't think it is a big deal. Dual opposing woofers are located on each side. Back side shows the nice analog and digital connectivity:
View attachment 517746
There is a modern and nicely looking/easy to use display that puts every other studio monitor to shame. It allows limited adjustments for location and sensitivity. On the latter, I tested the unit at -12 dB sensitivity. I will test for this more later but audible hiss was quite acceptable to me and faded out at 1 meter/3 feet.

Palmer Orbit 11 Monitor Measurements
As usual we start with our anechoic speaker frequency response and directivity measurements courtesy of Klippel Near-Field Scanner:
View attachment 517747
The most striking thing is seeing a speaker, of almost any size, being flat to 30 Hz and having extension down to 20 Hz!!! On-axis response is mostly flat with some low level undulations especially around 6 kHz.

Directivity however, seems uneven to me. There is some attempt at constant level but as you see in the blue dashed line, spacing between it and on-axis is not constant. That results in early window frequency response that is uneven and hence, room dependent:
View attachment 517748

The predicted in-room response, while being a simulation for far-field listening, shows a strong bass step response:
View attachment 517749

Speaker is likely to sound boomy. We will listen for this later.

Back to directivity, we can see that more clearly in our beam width response:
View attachment 517750

It is challenging to get a coaxial driver to have smooth response across full range.
View attachment 517751

The benefit of coaxial comes to play in vertical response which is far more even than any 2-way non-coaxial:
View attachment 517752

When I first started to test the speaker, I thought something was broken as the speaker clipping indicator would keep coming on. I realized after some testing that it does so at any level above 86 dBSPL. So no wonder distortion shoots way up at 96 dBSPL:
View attachment 517753
In addition to that, electronic limiting is provided which reduces bass response:
View attachment 517754
That's actually nice in the way sub-bass response just becomes distorted instead of severely bottoming out.

We can see the limitation much more clearly if we focus on bass:
View attachment 517755

We have exponential rise in distortion below 100 Hz even at 81 dBSPL. This would predict that you really need to listen at low levels if you want to enjoy full range response. Or else deploy a subwoofer.

Here is our waterfall:
View attachment 517756

And step response:
View attachment 517757

I wonder if that odd wiggle is power limiting even at this 86 dBSPL measurement.

Palmer Orbit 11 Listening Tests (Near-field)
First impression was that of warmth and deep bass -- something that just doesn't come for the ride in this size and price category. Alas, on sub-bass heavy tracks, I could barely turn up the volume, lest I wanted distortion and limited output. With bass that was not so deep, response was pretty good and speaker could get pretty loud before clipping indicator came on.

Listening more, what I heard was variable. At times, the response was very nice and full range, putting a smile on my face. But on other tracks, I would find the bass unwieldly. I applied some EQ and this helped a bit:
View attachment 517759

But the real solution likely requires fair bit of experimentation, measurement and fine tuning. Interactions with the room likely is another factor, making such tuning more difficult (with just the anechoic response).

Conclusions
The Orbit 11 is the third speaker in a row I have tested which extends the low end well below any prediction one would have. I kind of like this in that you have potential that you then get to optimize. A full-range response is something to be treasured. Alas, the tuning of the Orbit 11 is rough as predicted in the measurements and my listening tests. Bass either overwhelms or gets limited. The former can be managed I think, just not in quick manner. At the end of the day, the low cost and very small enclosure bring limitations here.

I would like to see one size larger version of Orbit 11 with more amplification power. And better tuning of the off-axis response as to provide a better in-room response.

As is, there is a lot of potential here so I am going to recommend the Palmer Orbit 11. Just be prepared to either use auto-EQ or fair bit of manual tuning. This is not a plug and play solution.

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

Thank you for the review, how does it compare to Genelec the Ones?

 

[illusonic]

Palmer THD taken from stoneeh ground plane (unechoic) measurements (see youtube)

 

[90sNintendoKid]

I quickly setup my Orbits this afternoon and did a quick calibration using biquads on my Minidsp Flex HTX.

I did some tests with a 40hz crossover to the subwoofers and I was pleased with the results for an initial calibration.

I was listening at around 75db and I didn’t noticed any signs of limiting.

Then listened at 85db and I didn’t think they were struggling nor did I notice signs of limiting or distortion.

I was watching some movie scenes and music.

I also tested the same movie scenes with the Orbits set to full range and no subs, I didn’t notice any problems at 85db.

I was sitting on my chair with a UMIK1 and REW open to check the levels.

I am sitting around 1.5 m away.

I will attach my post EQ measurements from REW when I am finished.

If I have time and feel like it, I may try them in my living room which is 2m from the front speakers and the mlp.

 

[Descartes]

D&D 8C has 1% K3 at >1kHz for 96dB SPL and never gets below 1% THD under 1kHz. The actual distortion frequency of k3 at 1kHz is 3kHz, right at the maximum sensitivity of the ear. That's definitely audible and just too much in my view, especially for a speaker of this size and price. And k3 at 1kHz is NOT related to cardioid dispersion but to 1250Hz tweeter crossover.

Kii Three is relatively close to the Orbits regarding overall size and their woofer membrane area is only about 30% larger than for the Orbits. And smaller woofers (Kii) usually have lower maximum excursion. From this perspective, bass output may still be higher for the Kii speaker but probably not very much.

You keep repeating that Kii Three and D&D 8C extend lower in cardioid dispersion. I think this is clear to everyone interested in this topic. The question is if this is a meaningfual disadvantage for the Orbit. Like the 8C, the Orbit should go close to the rear wall. This will maximize room gain and help to reduce rear wall reflection because lowest reflection frequency with 180° phase shift still falls into the cardioid range. So there is at least a chance that rear wall reflection is remedied by the Orbits. Besides that, the Orbits do at least control dispersion down to 250Hz. For example KH420 don't. So what's the point?

Much has been said about the small size of the Orbits being a disadvantage. And acoustically this is true. But in every other aspect small is better. And delivering big sound in small size is a feature that they could actually charge extra for. See size comparison below. Volume-wise the Orbits fit 2,5x into the 8C.

And then there is the coax which may not be absolutely perfect but is really well behaved. Kii Audio, D&D and also Neumann largely ignore vertical dispersion. Coax speakers are hard to get right and all of them decided not to try. As far as I know, they all use off-the-shelve parts, potentially with some customization/optimization. Palmer went all in and designed their own coax and the result actually makes them score very well in spinorama. Vertical dispersion will add to in-room response similar to horizontal dispersion. Add a little EQ to the Orbits and spinorama score is in the same class as their cardioid counterparts.

The Orbits are also the first speaker I have seen to feature vents for passive cardioid not only at the sides but also on top and bottom. And with their side firing woofers right behind the coax, they come very close to a point source. Technologically, I definitely rate them over the KH420 due to their unique combination of well executed features. And we don't have to wait for a larger model for Palmer to become competition to Neumann and Genelec. I expect them to make most revenues with small to medium size monitors. It would surprise me if they don't have Orbits for competitor analysis in their labs.

View attachment 520105

Comparing speakers that are 10 time the price is completely irrelevant’

 

[illusonic]

Comparing speakers that are 10 time the price is completely irrelevant’

Some may choose 90% performance for 10% price

 

[illusonic]

 

[KL....]

Some may choose 90% performance for 10% price

Thank you, @illusonic, Yes, the measure/price indicates this, doesn't it?

 

[illusonic]

Thank you, @illusonic, Yes, the measure/price indicates this, doesn't it?

Depends on how the performance is converted to %. This is related to use case, which may require certain features like cardioid down to 100Hz, perfect EQ out of the box or certain maximum SPL figures (which we actually don't know for Kii/D&D). Some may also value smaller size as an advantage for the Orbits.

For me it's maybe 80% of the bigger cardioid speakers from Kii and D&D as these have better horizontal dispersion characteristics including cardioid to 100Hz and higher maximum bass output. The Orbits shine in vertical dispersion which results in high Spinorama score - with a little EQ. Their SPL levels are sufficient for living room music playback without a sub. We should keep in mind that the last 20% are always the hardest to achieve. If 100%+ is the target one has to look at Ascilab C8C who are also lower price alternatives.

In any case price is important for the buying decision as well as technical performance. I think technical comparisons are absolutely valid - idependent of price. Seems like some want to protect high-cost speakers from competition. And it seems @Descartes doesn't even value the comparison to Genelec although he asked for it. Maybe he wants to elaborate a bit on why speakers may only be compared in similar price range.

Kii 7 is a very close comparison to Palmer Orbit 11 as it is the same size and weight. It has lower cardioid extension but also higher THD and lower maximum output in the bass. Again, horizontal dispersion is slightly better but vertical is much worse. Although Kii 7 is a good speaker, impressive for the size, I could not justify the price tag now that the Orbit is available. Same will probably apply for the upcoming D&D 6C for 10k EUR which are slightly bigger with the same weight. Their single 8" bass may be better than even 2 x 8" units in the Orbits but certainly not by a huge margin - if at all.

Kii and D&D produce speakers in Europe (NL/GER if I'm not mistaken) while the Orbit 11 is made in China (and engineered in Germany). This causes a good part of the price difference. And for some it may be worth paying extra. Palmer obviously also calculates with much lower margin. Kii/D&D prices can be high because they had kind of a monopoly on active cardioid speakers in user-friendly size. This has changed with the Orbits although these are not marketed to consumers, yet. Will be interesting to see if/how the Orbits influence the product landscape and pricing.

 

[artemtch63]

Only for Patreon users for now

 

[90sNintendoKid]

View attachment 522710



Only for Patreon users for now

I support Erin on Patreon and saw this too. I am looking forward to the video review.

 

[Mort]

He thinks it's a good $1800 speaker with a lot of quirky flaws.

 

[dfuller]

He thinks it's a good $1800 speaker with a lot of quirky flaws.

That's about where I'm at.